You failed your FBI polygraph not by simply failing one relevant question on the test, but by failing all of them. That's pretty much unheard of in polygraph, and I've never experienced it myself in all the exams I've conducted.

This can only mean one of three things:

1. George is the most dishonest, criminally-inclined person ever to be polygraphed in the history of the world. OR...

2. LBCB has not conducted very many exams and hasn't heard much about other exams.OR...

3. There is a serious problem regarding the lack of accuracy in polygraph exams.

Telling the truth and failing all relevant questions is not unheard of in polygraph testing, particularly when the true answer is no. I’ll not challenge your mind with the simple statistics and psychology behind this Sir. However, I must point out that when polygraph tests are used in employment screening, a fallacious machine often rejects the applicant outright and the real truth is never determined.

Other than George's case, I've never EVER heard of anyone failing ALL of the relevant questions on a polygraph screening exam. On a single-issue exam, such as a criminal exam, yes, but not on a screening exam. The relevant questions are of too wide a variety on a screening exam.

In my experience, there are only two reasons why someone would fail ALL of the relevant questions on a polygraph screening exam. First, they are actually lying on all of those questions, which in George's case I don't actually believe occurred. Or second, and much more likely, they have made the RELEVANT questions more significant to themselves by knowing or realizing that those are the only questions of true importance in the exam. I believe that a person's knowledge of countermeasures, and their attempts to amplify the reactions on the comparison questions can actually backfire because they make the relevant questions even more significant to themselves during the exam.

Information does not affect the validity of a comparison question test.

Authors: Honts, Charles R.1; Alloway, Wendy R.1 Source: Legal and Criminological Psychology, Volume 12, Number 2, September 2007, pp. 311-320(10) Publisher: British Psychological Society Abstract: Purpose: Detailed information about the comparison question test (CQT) and possible countermeasures are now available on the Internet. This study examined whether the provision of such information would affect the validity of the Test for Espionage and Sabotage, a directed lie variant of the CQT.

Method:Forty participants were divided into four equal groups: guilty, guilty informed, innocent, and innocent informed. During a first appointment, participants either did or did not commit a mock crime: then some were provided with a book containing detailed information on the CQT, including possible countermeasures. After 1 week with the book, all participants were administered a CQT during their second appointment. Following the polygraph, participants responded to a questionnaire that asked them about their behavior and perceptions during their examination.

Results:There were no significant effects of providing information on the validity of the CQT. However, the reported use of countermeasures was associated with a lower probability of truthfulness. Results of the debriefing questionnaire were found to support predictions made by the theory of the CQT.

Conclusions:Concerns that readily available information will enable guilty individuals to produce false-negative errors seem unfounded. Moreover, the results actually indicate that the use of countermeasures was associated with a lower probability of truthfulness, which was exactly the opposite outcome predicted by the CQT critics

Posts to this (or any) discussion thread should ideally address the relevant topic. In this case, the relevant topic is Dr. Richardson's challenge to the polygraph community to prove their claimed ability to detect polygraph countermeasures. This challenge has now gone more than six years without a single taker.

I have heard of the challenge in the past on this site. I looked at this from all the angles I could and thought to myself the following:

1. Why would the polygraph community consent to this AS IF you and they were two equal bodies out to prove something. They do there own such research already internally. I'm told that they may view you folks as in a weird way an asset as their funding has increased, and the demand for examiners never greater.

2. The fact that the challenge is from "Dr." Richardson would appear to lend credibility on the face of it, but I'm told that Dr. Richardson barely graduated from DodPI himself. If this is wrong could he please post his class standing among his peers and score / average.

3. If as you state such a test were to take place, WHO would eveluate the data as a perceived unbiased body ? I would eliminate anyone with bias for or against. I further wondered how you could have a control group in this.

4. Further, can a lab study in any tasking duplicate real world conditions ?

5. If this test data went against you it most certainly NOT put this issue or site to rest, so where is the gain for those who do this for a living ?

2. The fact that the challenge is from "Dr." Richardson would appear to lend credibility on the face of it, but I'm told that Dr. Richardson barely graduated from DodPI himself. If this is wrong could he please post his class standing among his peers and score / average.

I can attest that Dr Richardson did indeed graduate from DODPI and he had no trouble with the academic portion of the training.

4. Further, can a lab study in any tasking duplicate real world conditions ?

I believe this exact question is posed when criticizing the lab experiements and studies which attempt to validate the accuracy of polygraphy, and the ability to detect countermeasures. Of course, lab studies are good enough for those purposes...

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams." (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)

Thank You for attesting to his graduation, but that was not in question. My source told me that it takes a 70% minimum to graduate, and that he did not get much at all above that. I was shocked if this were true, as the expectation of one with a PhD after their name might imply the ability to grasp the information at a much higher level.

My question dealth with his class standing and average in the class. 70%, 80%, 90% / 1st in the class, or 4th out of 36 etc.

In reality, both sides criticize lab studies as missing inherant jeopardy to be regarded as an exact parallel to real world field data. Therefore, minus jeopardy in the equation, how can a countermeasure challenge or study be done from anything other than field recorded charts ? Such charts are on file with DoDPI / DACA, and are used in the evaluation. I have heard of a concept called "Drift" which is also being looked at and qualified / quantified as a variable in countermeasures.

From a retired deputy and polygraphist from Florida. You can beat the examiner but not the instrument! Its how you interview, the polygraph is just a tool. Criminal and pre employment testing are two different tests. If the examiner knows what he/she is doing, and they are good, they should see the countermeasures. Even when they decide to play with their sphincter, if its not at the right time you loose! As far as the GSR tricks, the GSR can be placed in other areas with good results. As far as a book to beat the test, its a fishing expediation on a pre employment- see what you nibble at. Criminal tests are the best and easy.I did quite a bit before law enforcement and college. If on the street, ya dump the dope whatever. Speeding, a warning. I was one that rembers his roots, and wont stroke you for something I did. The examiner can go by their gut. I know if you arent upfront, I dont have to fail you on a drug question if I have good vibes on a person.I will inform the applicant inbetween tests only, to quit the countermeasures. If by the third question or so I will stop the test and let them out.You get a good examiner that is upfront and phrases the question best for the applicant, then they wont need the counter measures. Change the question to: when was the last time you ..... Puts the applicant at ease. No other problems, continue the person in the process, and note reactions to CYA. If you flatline from a drug or its overacting on GSR (depends) reschedule, or ya get a question from left field and see what happens. No reaction, process stops there! (there is more to this)Best to be upfront from the start-BUT, to an extent!!!!!!!! Why people say the things they do beats me. FYI: I stand while testing the person. Screw up on a counter measure, and the next weekly meeting of background examiners, that are from different departments, and one mentions your name, you are SOL!!98 % validity on specific/crime test. PE-pre employment is a fishing expediation 2% goes to countermeasures, BUT, this is with a good qualified examiner and done properly.If you arent sure, YOU/I let the person continue in the process. An examiner that takes the time to explain things to the applicant they wont have to use counter measures. Look, You made it to this step (or you are gathering information) dont screw it up.A book? Its a joke, dont waste your money. Takes 2 areas to knock a person out of the process. Your a bad apple, you will most likely mess up on the poly, psych, or oral. Dont blame the examiner. Been doing this since 84Its a great job, but when you resort to a counter measure, and I see it, you are done!! Find another career. You people are so negative on polygraphs. I have gone out of my way to get somebody hired that was too honest, but the problem areas were in the past and the applicant was over standards. Exceptions can be made!!!!!!If you cant get the first two questions right, you BETTER USE COUNTER MEASURES!! NO BOOK WILL HELP!!

TCThe 2% on a specific test if done correctly is from counter measuers.The pre employment is about 12 questions repeated twice with a 2-3 minutes inbetween to rest the arm. Iy I suspect one is using countermeasuers say with breathing, I will let the charts run inbetween charts and see the change in the cardio for breathing. You dont see my paper going, and I might ask you something or instruct you to breath naturally. Your breathing changes on the second test to normal fine, if not I might rescheduld or plain end your process at that point. Subjective, up to the examiner and how I feel towards the applicant. Never stim an applicant!!! Never say inbetween tests you show reactions to say for example to the drug questions. If done, that question will be on the persons mind and show a larger reaction the second test. If that ever happens, tell the examiner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have seen it done by polygraphists. Tell the person in charge of your process, and they will set you for another test. Be advised, you fail the first examiner, 9 out of 10 times the second examiner will go with the firsts rec. I call it the way I see it! But on the other hand have passed people that have been failed as well. Same for the psychological, People can request or pay for it on their own if the dept says it is ok and must be one of the many psychs the dept uses. There are good examiners and bad ones. Same for doctors or lawyers.AGAIN, the 98% is fact. The book is The Scientific Validity of the Polygraph. Takes 2 areas to be declined!!! You should be more worried on the psychological or oral board!!!!!!!! Hope that helped some

From a retired deputy and polygraphist from Florida. You can beat the examiner but not the instrument! Its how you interview, the polygraph is just a tool. Criminal and pre employment testing are two different tests. If the examiner knows what he/she is doing, and they are good, they should see the countermeasures. Even when they decide to play with their sphincter, if its not at the right time you loose! As far as the GSR tricks, the GSR can be placed in other areas with good results. As far as a book to beat the test, its a fishing expediation on a pre employment- see what you nibble at. Criminal tests are the best and easy.I did quite a bit before law enforcement and college. If on the street, ya dump the dope whatever. Speeding, a warning. I was one that rembers his roots, and wont stroke you for something I did. The examiner can go by their gut. I know if you arent upfront, I dont have to fail you on a drug question if I have good vibes on a person.I will inform the applicant inbetween tests only, to quit the countermeasures. If by the third question or so I will stop the test and let them out.You get a good examiner that is upfront and phrases the question best for the applicant, then they wont need the counter measures. Change the question to: when was the last time you ..... Puts the applicant at ease. No other problems, continue the person in the process, and note reactions to CYA. If you flatline from a drug or its overacting on GSR (depends) reschedule, or ya get a question from left field and see what happens. No reaction, process stops there! (there is more to this)Best to be upfront from the start-BUT, to an extent!!!!!!!! Why people say the things they do beats me. FYI: I stand while testing the person. Screw up on a counter measure, and the next weekly meeting of background examiners, that are from different departments, and one mentions your name, you are SOL!!98 % validity on specific/crime test. PE-pre employment is a fishing expediation 2% goes to countermeasures, BUT, this is with a good qualified examiner and done properly.If you arent sure, YOU/I let the person continue in the process. An examiner that takes the time to explain things to the applicant they wont have to use counter measures. Look, You made it to this step (or you are gathering information) dont screw it up.A book? Its a joke, dont waste your money. Takes 2 areas to knock a person out of the process. Your a bad apple, you will most likely mess up on the poly, psych, or oral. Dont blame the examiner. Been doing this since 84Its a great job, but when you resort to a counter measure, and I see it, you are done!! Find another career. You people are so negative on polygraphs. I have gone out of my way to get somebody hired that was too honest, but the problem areas were in the past and the applicant was over standards. Exceptions can be made!!!!!!If you cant get the first two questions right, you BETTER USE COUNTER MEASURES!! NO BOOK WILL HELP!!

If your gut feel tells you that certain people are honest, then why proceed to test them ? Dont you trust your own intelligence against a 1935 model machine ?

I think that your examinees must have been simpletons if you caught them sooo easily iro CM's. The 'book' and indeed any examiner worth his salt, can teach a reasonably intelligent person how to beat the test.(because telling the truth doesnt really get you where you deserve to be)

Since my recent challenge to George and Gino to establish their credentials, there has been a few renewed comments regarding Drew Richardson's polygraph countermeasure challenge. This thread begins with Drew relating the amusing and informative story about how he first laid this challenge before the NAS committee.

Since new interest has been generated, perhaps it is time for the readers to read, as Paul Harvey, R.I.P. used to say "The Rest of the Story" about his presentation to the NAS.

According to BFL incorporated, the prestigious Dr, Drew Richardson, former Chief of the FBI's Counter-Terrorism Unit, joined Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories in 2001 as Vice President of Forensic Operations just a few weeks before Sept. 11, 2001. They are a privately held commercial interest promoting and selling theory and technology for the use of the "P300/MERMER" (memory and encoding related multifaceted electroencephalographic response wave for the detection of deception and concealed information. This provides Richardson with a financial motive to try to convince folks that polygraph does not work.

Based on George’s notes, which he has posted elsewhere on this website; at the time Richardson spoke to NAS on October 17 2001 he represented himself only with his FBI and Research credentials and failed to inform the committee of his possible conflict of interest based on profit. His BFL Inc. boss, Lawrence Farwell, immediately followed Richardson’s presentation with a P300 sales pitch. YES, conveniently right behind Richardson’s criticism of polygraph. The final NAS report does not indicate that they had any knowledge of Richardson’s employment or financial interest in a technology attempting to compete with polygraph.

If George is telling the truth about Richardson’s presentation to NAS and Richardson failed to disclose an obvious profit based ulterior motive that potentially colored his comments, I believe that he conducted himself in an unethical manner.

George's motives are arguably "Not for Profit". I don't think the same can be said for Dr. Drew Richardson. I think his motives are more about the money.

Now you know "The Rest of the Story" Good Day

P.S. Sergeant, how would you feel about having your brain scanned as part of the police applicant process?

P.S.S. Cullen, How would you feel about a periodic counterintelligence brain scan as a condition of continued employment?

The information and arguments set forth in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector are not based on any claimed authority by myself or Gino Scalabrini… neither Gino Scalabrini nor myself hold degrees in polygraph-related fields… We make no claims of infallibility…Dr. George W. Mashcke 10 May 2009.